CAMDEN, N.J. — The Wall Township Board of Education has been ordered to pay $284,654.75 in attorneys’ fees and litigation costs after a federal judge reconsidered a previous fee award that had been vacated by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
In an opinion issued Thursday, U.S. District Judge Karen M. Williams granted in part a renewed fee application filed by former student Micayla Augustyn, concluding she was entitled to recover substantially more than previously awarded after prevailing under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).
The decision follows a 2025 Third Circuit ruling that affirmed Augustyn qualified as a prevailing party under the IDEA but found the district court had improperly reduced her attorneys’ fee award. The appellate court returned the case to the district court with instructions to recalculate the award using the proper legal standards.
Augustyn sought a total of $309,007.58 in attorneys’ fees and costs related to administrative proceedings, federal litigation, appeals, and post-remand proceedings.
Long-running special education dispute
The lawsuit arose from allegations that the Wall Township Board of Education denied Augustyn a free appropriate public education (FAPE) by failing to properly implement her Individualized Education Program (IEP) during high school.
According to the opinion, shortly before graduating in 2018, Augustyn’s mother sought mediation through the New Jersey Department of Education, requesting corrections to Augustyn’s grades and compensatory education services.
After mediation failed, the dispute proceeded to a due process hearing before an administrative law judge and eventually into federal court.
Judge Williams noted that the Third Circuit had already determined Augustyn was entitled to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees under the IDEA’s fee-shifting provisions.
Court reduces request but awards majority
Although Augustyn requested more than $309,000, the court found certain portions of the request should be reduced while concluding that most of the work performed by her attorneys was reasonable and compensable.
The judge ultimately awarded $284,654.75 in attorneys’ fees and litigation costs.
The opinion represents the latest chapter in years of litigation over the school district’s obligations under federal special education law and the legal fees generated by the dispute.
- Third Circuit previously ruled Augustyn qualified as the prevailing party.
- Federal judge reconsidered the fee award following remand.
- Plaintiff requested more than $309,000 in fees and costs.
- Court awarded $284,654.75.
- Award covers administrative proceedings, federal litigation and appeals.
Fee-shifting provisions under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act are intended to allow parents and students who successfully enforce their rights under federal special education law to recover reasonable legal expenses. Courts evaluate requested fees using factors that include prevailing market rates, the reasonableness of the hours worked, and the overall success achieved during the litigation.
FAQ
Who is Micayla Augustyn?
She is the former Wall Township student who filed an IDEA lawsuit alleging the school district failed to properly provide services required under her Individualized Education Program.
What did the federal judge decide?
The court awarded Augustyn $284,654.75 in attorneys’ fees and costs after reconsidering the issue following a Third Circuit remand.
Why was the case sent back to the district court?
The Third Circuit ruled that while Augustyn was entitled to attorneys’ fees as the prevailing party, the original reduction in fees relied on improper legal considerations.
What law governs the case?
The dispute arises under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which allows prevailing parties to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees in certain cases.
Will the litigation continue?
The opinion resolves the renewed attorneys’ fee motion. Any further proceedings would depend on whether either party seeks additional appellate review.
Sources: U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, Augustyn v. Wall Township Board of Education, Civil Action No. 20-5218; U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, Augustyn v. Wall Township Board of Education, 139 F.4th 252 (2025).
